Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun with the Fuji X-Pro 2 and X-T 2

ptomsu

ptomsu

Workshop Member
iiiNelson said:
Maybe but there’s a lot of assumption in that. I mean perfect for a probable tangible camera in the next 2-6 months.

In reality the GFX is a lot speedier now (with the latest firmware) than it was when I tested it in March and ergonomically it fits my hand like a glove. I could get by with the 32-64 and 110 for most thing and it will be nearly identical to most of my most used ranges on Sony FE (25-85). My only hesitation is that I really don’t want to venture down the first generation digital product again really as I did that with both the Leica M9 (first FF rangefinder) and the A7 (first FF mirrorless).

Overall I’m extremely pleased with the Sony FE system but with deadlines and a hectic schedule between my 9-5, growing my personal business in the coming year, returning to school recently, and the prerequisite family time - I would like a camera that place me from in front of a computer more. Fuji arguably has the best JPEG’s in the business and I can archive the RAW’s for myself and cull/deliver JPEG’s for editorial deadlines. For a more compact camera the X series IQ is “good enough” but I’m sure there are days I will long for the resolution should I drop my Sony system (which is where the potential GFX comes into the picture). I really could get by with an XT2 but I assume the XH1 will be more ergonomically pleasing for those with larger hands and if I do pick up a GFX-S/R type then functionally it’ll be closer to it.

Well thats my thought process was but I should see how much of my gear I can sell before making any grand plans.
Click to expand...
I understand what you are looking for! And maybe the GFX would be the right tool for this, although for me the X-H1 would probably be sufficient - if I had to decide between the 2.

But then, actually I made the decision for myself that m43 is just right for me - in form of the Olympus EM1.2 and the Olympus Pro lens lineup. This is why I sold finally all my Fuji gear. And so far I did not regret it! Olympus JPEGs are at least as good as Fuji JPEGs (at least for me) and I would not like to wait till Fuji matures their IBIS that comes first in the X-H1 till it gets to the perfection of what you are getting already today from Olympus (or Panasonic) - speak DUAL IS. And if it comes to resolution, if 20MP are not enough then also 24MP will not be and I am sure we will see resolution in m43 around 30MP with the next generation of m43 sensors. So simply wait for a EM1.3 or GH6 and you also will have the resolution. And when taking high res shooting into account even 80MP or more are available - today for static subjects but in the future also at least for slow moving subjects - quasi static.

This all is just a thought process you have to be willing to move through!

So why not choose the real future system when already thinking about change?

Just my 5c ...
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
ptomsu said:
I understand what you are looking for! And maybe the GFX would be the right tool for this, although for me the X-H1 would probably be sufficient - if I had to decide between the 2.

But then, actually I made the decision for myself that m43 is just right for me - in form of the Olympus EM1.2 and the Olympus Pro lens lineup. This is why I sold finally all my Fuji gear. And so far I did not regret it! Olympus JPEGs are at least as good as Fuji JPEGs (at least for me) and I would not like to wait till Fuji matures their IBIS that comes first in the X-H1 till it gets to the perfection of what you are getting already today from Olympus (or Panasonic) - speak DUAL IS. And if it comes to resolution, if 20MP are not enough then also 24MP will not be and I am sure we will see resolution in m43 around 30MP with the next generation of m43 sensors. So simply wait for a EM1.3 or GH6 and you also will have the resolution. And when taking high res shooting into account even 80MP or more are available - today for static subjects but in the future also at least for slow moving subjects - quasi static.

This all is just a thought process you have to be willing to move through!

So why not choose the real future system when already thinking about change?

Just my 5c ...
Click to expand...
I don’t wanna get too far off topic but if I purchased the GFX it would be in combination with either the XT2 or XH1. I’d probably get a GFX with the 32-64 and 110 and a XH1/XT2 with the 50-140.

I do still have a Micro 4/3 camera (my original G1 + 14-45 is all I kept from that system but I do prefer Panasonic colors to the Olympus ones though that 100% subjective) and they are fine cameras no doubt but having color consistency between a “do everything” system and a “no compromise” system like the GFX is a big determining factor for me personally if I were to seriously consider a system switch. I’m over trying to make colors look alike across different systems (though I can get close) which was one of my reasons for selling my Leica kit once I was comfortable with my more flexible Sony kit. As such I’m really ONLY considering Fujifilm as a viable option to switch from Sony with them having both the X and G line.

On a side note nice shots to everyone contributing and i appreciate the feedback. Maybe I’ll join everyone here in time but maybe I’ll stay put with Sony. We will see. I try not to make many emotional decisions
 
ptomsu

ptomsu

Workshop Member
iiiNelson said:
I don’t wanna get too far off topic but if I purchased the GFX it would be in combination with either the XT2 or XH1. I’d probably get a GFX with the 32-64 and 110 and a XH1/XT2 with the 50-140.

I do still have a Micro 4/3 camera (my original G1 + 14-45 is all I kept from that system but I do prefer Panasonic colors to the Olympus ones though that 100% subjective) and they are fine cameras no doubt but having color consistency between a “do everything” system and a “no compromise” system like the GFX is a big determining factor for me personally if I were to seriously consider a system switch. I’m over trying to make colors look alike across different systems (though I can get close) which was one of my reasons for selling my Leica kit once I was comfortable with my more flexible Sony kit. As such I’m really ONLY considering Fujifilm as a viable option to switch from Sony with them having both the X and G line.

On a side note nice shots to everyone contributing and i appreciate the feedback. Maybe I’ll join everyone here in time but maybe I’ll stay put with Sony. We will see. I try not to make many emotional decisions
Click to expand...
Good decision - if I would go MFD I would also go most probably Fuji GFX. A X-system complementary camera makes definitely then most sense. In this case I would wait for the X-H1.
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
ptomsu said:
Good decision - if I would go MFD I would also go most probably Fuji GFX. A X-system complementary camera makes definitely then most sense. In this case I would wait for the X-H1.
Click to expand...
I agree and the GFX seems to be a bit less quirky than the Hasselblad though the Hasselblad seems to have a better native software solution with Phocus.
 
ptomsu

ptomsu

Workshop Member
iiiNelson said:
I agree and the GFX seems to be a bit less quirky than the Hasselblad though the Hasselblad seems to have a better native software solution with Phocus.
Click to expand...
Phocus is great, but only for Hasselblad files. Any other you have to take your already known RAW converter. I would not hesitate a minute to go the Fuji way instead of Hasselblad - this company is still not sure for me tu survive long term, but Fuji will!

For me there is no doubt that LR is the overall best RAW converter for RAF files, as it natively supports all the available Film Simulations, which is one of the most important parts for me at least of the Fuji ecosystem.
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
TClair said:
+1 on Iridient X-Transformer, the DNG files are so much nicer to work with.
Click to expand...
Thankfully I already have Iridient Developer but I use Capture One primarily for catalogs and processing. I also use Affinity Photo. Between these I really don’t miss Adobe nor do I have plans to return to it.
 
4

4711

Member
ptomsu said:
Phocus is great, but only for Hasselblad files. Any other you have to take your already known RAW converter. I would not hesitate a minute to go the Fuji way instead of Hasselblad - this company is still not sure for me tu survive long term, but Fuji will!

For me there is no doubt that LR is the overall best RAW converter for RAF files, as it natively supports all the available Film Simulations, which is one of the most important parts for me at least of the Fuji ecosystem.
Click to expand...
It depends on the lenses you plan to use. If you stay in the 28mm-90mm range, the Hasselblad H1D is the better option. A lot lighter and more comfortable to handle. The GFX feels like heavy Lego.

I rather would pick then a Hasselblad H or V camera.
 
iiiNelson

iiiNelson

Well-known member
4711 said:
It depends on the lenses you plan to use. If you stay in the 28mm-90mm range, the Hasselblad H1D is the better option. A lot lighter and more comfortable to handle. The GFX feels like heavy Lego.

I rather would pick then a Hasselblad H or V camera.
Click to expand...
We can all agree that the choice between X1D and GFX is subjective.

I believe most will agree the X1D is more attractive on a shelf. I personally feel (after holding both) the GFX is more comfortable in my hands... but the X1D is comfortable to hold as well. An articulating screen would make the X1D vs. GFX a harder choice for me. I hope Hasselblad decides to add a tilting screen for the successor.
 
Shashin

Shashin

Well-known member
Breaking out of a rut, this is with the 14mm. It is the first time I have used this lens with the B+W 093 IR filter.

 
S

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Re: Stone wall tests with 16/1.4 and 23/1.4 lenses on X-T2

I was asked by a correspondent on another forum if he should return his X-T2 and lenses because of unacceptable corner softness which he suspected meant that there was field curvature. Sean Reid a year or two ago went over all of this and gave a high recommendation to the f/1.4 (and f/1.2) large optically corrected XF lenses, while acknowledging that the f/2 lenses were contrasty, don't block the X-Pro2 viewfinder, but slightly less sharp at any aperture than the f/1.4 series. So I ran my own test series, and have put the results up on Flicker as an album. No redeeming artistic value, but the answer is that from f/4 to f/8, both the 16 and 23mm XF lenses are sharp enough for me from edge to edge. From 1.4 to 2.8 there is a little corner softening and there is fairly obvious vignetting in both lenses at f/1.4. Landscape shooting at f/1.4 is not advised.

The evidence is at https://www.flickr.com/gp/133969392@N05/WV9v9s .

scott
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top